Provider profilesn The 2016 Execution Management System Survey

In 2016 more than 22 providers received at least one response in the Survey. However it is
clear that for those that have
not already built a significant
client base, it will be hard for
them to do so from here. Aside
from the eight providers profiled
earlier, the remaining 14
accounted for only 10% of the
total of all respondents. They
represented a similar proportion
by weight. Fully 25% of those
using one or more of these
providers is considering
changing in the coming twelve
months, suggesting there may
be a reduction in client numbers
rather than the much desired
increase. Among the group are
three systems operated by
brokers, Passport (Morgan
Stanley), Pinpoint (UBS) and
Neovest (J.P. Morgan). In
addition REDI, now independent
but still closely associated in the
minds of clients with Goldman
Sachs also received responses.

Of these only Passport managed
an overall score better than the
Survey average. Among other
names many offer an EMS
capability as part of a broader
core product offering. Firms
such as Charles River and IRESS
saw response numbers well
down on 2015 levels and
achieved at best satisfactory
scores. While there is no doubt
that the EMS capabilities of
some of the broader product
firms have attracted a good
following it is also clear that
firms that began life as
dedicated EMS providers
continue to perform most
strongly.

Other firms include ULLINK,Flex Trade, and Linedata all ofwhom consistently feature, butonly Linedata achieved anymeasure of success in terms ofscores, and that across anarrowly defined client base.Scores above 6.0 (Very Good)were extremely rare among allthese providers. In fact thenumber of situations wherescores failed to beat 5.0 (Good)outnumbered those wherescores were higher than 6.0.

It is not clear what strategy
these firms should pursue going
forward. It is not obvious that
the base of business is sufficient
to support the necessary next
level of investment. Nor is it
obvious why or how an EMS
capability is essential to the
other aspects of functionality
being provided to customers. At
the same time requiring clients
to put in a completely new
system to cover an integrated
EMS will not be popular. It
seems inevitable that
consolidation will occur. It is
simply a question of when and
how. In the meantime a steady
loss of clients seems the most
likely outcome, with value being
reduced with each lost customer.

That is hardly an enticingprospect. nOther providersOther firms include ULLINK, FlexTrade, and Linedata all ofwhom consistently feature, but only Linedata achieved anymeasure of success in terms of scores, and that across a narrowlydefined client base.